| UNITED STATES |
| SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION |
| Washington, D.C. 20549 |
| FORM N-CSR |
| CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED MANAGEMENT |
| INVESTMENT COMPANIES |
| Investment Company Act file number 811-6644 |
| DREYFUS MASSACHUSETTS INTERMEDIATE MUNICIPAL BOND FUND |
| (Exact name of Registrant as specified in charter) |
| c/o The Dreyfus Corporation |
| 200 Park Avenue |
| New York, New York 10166 |
| (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code) |
| Mark N. Jacobs, Esq. |
| 200 Park Avenue |
| New York, New York 10166 |
| (Name and address of agent for service) |
| Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (212) 922-6000 |
| Date of fiscal year end: | 3/31 | |
| Date of reporting period: | 9/30/05 |
FORM N-CSR
Item 1. Reports to Stockholders.
Save time. Save paper. View your next shareholder report online as soon as it’s available. Log into www.dreyfus.com and sign up for Dreyfus eCommunications. It’s simple and only takes a few minutes.
The views expressed in this report reflect those of the portfolio manager only through the end of the period covered and do not necessarily represent the views of Dreyfus or any other person in the Dreyfus organization. Any such views are subject to change at any time based upon market or other conditions and Dreyfus disclaims any responsibility to update such views.These views may not be relied on as investment advice and, because investment decisions for a Dreyfus fund are based on numerous factors, may not be relied on as an indication of trading intent on behalf of any Dreyfus fund.
Not FDIC-Insured • Not Bank-Guaranteed • May Lose Value
| Contents | ||
| THE FUND | ||
| 2 | Letter from the Chairman | |
| 3 | Discussion of Fund Performance | |
| 6 | Understanding Your Fund’s Expenses | |
| 6 | Comparing Your Fund’s Expenses | |
| With Those of Other Funds | ||
| 7 | Statement of Investments | |
| 13 | Statement of Assets and Liabilities | |
| 14 | Statement of Operations | |
| 15 | Statement of Changes in Net Assets | |
| 16 | Financial Highlights | |
| 17 | Notes to Financial Statements | |
| 22 | Information About the Review and Approval | |
| of the Fund’s Management Agreement | ||
| FOR MORE INFORMATION | ||
| Back Cover | ||
| Dreyfus Massachusetts |
| Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund |
The Fund
LETTER FROM THE CHAIRMAN
Dear Shareholder:
This semiannual report for Dreyfus Massachusetts Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund covers the six-month period from April 1, 2005, through September 30, 2005. Inside, you’ll find valuable information about how the fund was managed during the reporting period, including a discussion with the fund’s portfolio manager, Scott Sprauer.
Although yields of longer-term municipal bonds recently have begun to creep upward, they remained relatively low over the past six months even as short-term interest rates rose steadily. Moderate economic growth, low inflation expectations among U.S. investors and robust investor demand appear to have supported the tax-exempt bond market, offsetting concerns related to greater new issuance volume, soaring energy prices and the Federal Reserve Board’s gradual move toward a less accommodative monetary policy.
Recent events — including sharply higher gasoline and energy prices, and Hurricane Katrina — have added a degree of uncertainty to the economic outlook, which could buoy investor sentiment in the bond market. Conversely, high energy and commodity prices could lead to greater inflation concerns, which may discourage some fixed-income investors. As always, we encourage you to discuss these and other matters with your financial advisor.
Thank you for your continued confidence and support.
| 2 |
DISCUSSION OF FUND PERFORMANCE
Scott Sprauer, Portfolio Manager
How did Dreyfus Massachusetts Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund perform relative to its benchmark?
For the six-month period ended September 30, 2005, the fund achieved a total return of 2.27% .1 In comparison, the Lehman Brothers 7-Year Municipal Bond Index (the “Index”), the fund’s benchmark index, achieved a total return of 2.22% for the same period.2 In addition, the average total return for all funds reported in the Lipper Massachusetts Intermediate Municipal Debt Funds category was 2.00% .3
Low inflation expectations and robust investor demand helped municipal bonds withstand the potentially eroding effects of rising short-term interest rates during the reporting period.The fund produced a higher return than its benchmark and Lipper category average, which we attribute in part to its emphasis on bonds toward the longer end of the intermediate-term maturity range.
What is the fund’s investment approach?
The fund’s objective is to seek as high a level of income exempt from federal and Commonwealth of Massachusetts income taxes as is consistent with the preservation of capital.
To pursue its goal, the fund normally invests substantially all of its assets in municipal bonds that provide income exempt from federal and Massachusetts state personal income taxes.The dollar-weighted average maturity of the fund’s portfolio ranges between three and 10 years. Although the fund currently intends to invest only in investment-grade municipal bonds, or the unrated equivalent as determined by Dreyfus, it has the ability to invest up to 20% of its assets in municipal bonds of below investment-grade credit quality.
We may buy and sell bonds based on credit quality, market outlook and yield potential. In selecting municipal bonds for investment, we may assess the current interest-rate environment and the municipal
| The Fund 3 |
| DISCUSSION OF FUND PERFORMANCE (continued) |
bond’s potential volatility in different rate environments.We focus on bonds with the potential to offer attractive current income, typically looking for bonds that can provide consistently attractive current yields or that are trading at competitive market prices.A portion of the fund’s assets may be allocated to “discount” bonds, which are bonds that sell at a price below their face value, or to “premium” bonds, which are bonds that sell at a price above their face value.The fund’s allocation to either discount bonds or to premium bonds will change along with our changing views of the current interest-rate and market environment.We also may look to select bonds that are most likely to obtain attractive prices when sold.
What other factors influenced the fund’s performance?
Rising short-term interest rates represented a significant factor affecting the fund’s performance during the reporting period. In its ongoing effort to move away from its accommodative monetary policy of the past several years, the Federal Reserve Board (the “Fed”) raised the overnight federal funds rate from 2.75% at the start of the reporting period to 3.75% by the end.Yields of municipal bonds with short maturities rose along with interest rates, eroding the value of those securities.
Contrary to historical norms, however, longer-term bond yields fell slightly during the reporting period, as their prices were supported by low inflation and robust investor demand for U.S. fixed-income securities. As a result, yield differences between shorter- and longer-term bonds narrowed, producing better performance at the long end of the maturity spectrum.
In addition, municipal bonds generally benefited from favorable supply-and-demand dynamics. Although the national supply of newly issued municipal bonds rose to record levels as issuers refinanced existing debt at lower rates, the additional volume was absorbed easily by robust demand from investors, including non-traditional market participants attracted by high after-tax returns relative to comparable taxable bonds.
Finally, Massachusetts enjoyed higher tax revenues in the recovering economy, helping it to adopt a balanced budget that increases state aid
| 4 |
to local municipalities for various education and transportation projects. In light of Massachusetts’ improved fiscal condition, one of the major bond rating agencies upgraded its credit rating for the state’s uninsured general obligation bonds.
In this environment,we maintained the fund’s average duration in a range we considered slightly longer than industry averages, which helped us capture stronger returns at the long end of its maturity range. In addition, we tended to favor bonds selling at modest premiums to their face values, which tend to hold more of their value during market declines.
What is the fund’s current strategy?
The U.S. economy has continued to send mixed signals. Although consumer spending may be held back by high energy prices and the lingering effects of the Gulf Coast hurricanes, the Fed has signaled its intention to continue raising short-term interest rates.Accordingly, we have maintained the fund’s generally neutral investment posture, including a duration that we believe will be in line with its peers, and a focus on premium-structured bonds. Of course, we are prepared to adjust our strategies as market conditions change.
| October 17, 2005 |
| 1 | Total return includes reinvestment of dividends and any capital gains paid. Past performance is no | |
| guarantee of future results. Share price, yield and investment return fluctuate such that upon | ||
| redemption, fund shares may be worth more or less than their original cost. Income may be subject | ||
| to state and local taxes for non-Massachusetts residents, and some income may be subject to the | ||
| federal alternative minimum tax (AMT) for certain investors. Capital gains, if any, are fully | ||
| taxable. Return figures provided reflect the absorption of certain fund expenses by The Dreyfus | ||
| Corporation pursuant to an undertaking in effect that may be extended, terminated or modified at | ||
| any time. Had these expenses not been absorbed, the fund’s return would have been lower. | ||
| 2 | SOURCE: LIPPER INC. — Reflects reinvestment of dividends and, where applicable, capital | |
| gain distributions.The Lehman Brothers 7-Year Municipal Bond Index is an unmanaged total | ||
| return performance benchmark for the investment-grade, geographically unrestricted 7-year tax- | ||
| exempt bond market, consisting of municipal bonds with maturities of 6-8 years. Index returns do | ||
| not reflect the fees and expenses associated with operating a mutual fund. | ||
| 3 | Source: Lipper Inc. |
| The Fund 5 |
U N D E R S TA N D I N G YO U R F U N D ’ S E X P E N S E S ( U n a u d i t e d )
As a mutual fund investor, you pay ongoing expenses, such as management fees and other expenses. Using the information below, you can estimate how these expenses affect your investment and compare them with the expenses of other funds.You also may pay one-time transaction expenses, including sales charges (loads) and redemption fees, which are not shown in this section and would have resulted in higher total expenses. For more information, see your fund’s prospectus or talk to your financial adviser.
Review your fund’s expenses
The table below shows the expenses you would have paid on a $1,000 investment in Dreyfus Massachusetts Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund from April 1, 2005 to September 30, 2005. It also shows how much a $1,000 investment would be worth at the close of the period, assuming actual returns and expenses.
| Expenses and Value of a $1,000 Investment | ||
| assuming actual returns for the six months ended September 30, 2005 | ||
| Expenses paid per $1,000 † | $ 3.96 | |
| Ending value (after expenses) | $1,022.70 | |
COMPARING YOUR FUND’S EXPENSES WITH THOSE OF OTHER FUNDS (Unaudited)
Using the SEC’s method to compare expenses
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has established guidelines to help investors assess fund expenses. Per these guidelines, the table below shows your fund’s expenses based on a $1,000 investment, assuming a hypothetical 5% annualized return. You can use this information to compare the ongoing expenses (but not transaction expenses or total cost) of investing in the fund with those of other funds.All mutual fund shareholder reports will provide this information to help you make this comparison. Please note that you cannot use this information to estimate your actual ending account balance and expenses paid during the period.
| Expenses and Value of a $1,000 Investment | ||
| assuming a hypothetical 5% annualized return for the six months ended September 30, 2005 | ||
| Expenses paid per $1,000 † | $ 3.95 | |
| Ending value (after expenses) | $1,021.16 | |
† Expenses are equal to the fund’s annualized expense ratio of .78%, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 183/365 (to reflect the one-half year period).
| 6 |
| STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS |
| September 30, 2005 (Unaudited) |
| Principal | ||||
| Long-Term Municipal Investments—95.8% | Amount ($) | Value ($) | ||
| Massachusetts—76.0% | ||||
| Berkshire Hills Regional School District | ||||
| 5%, 10/15/2015 (Insured; FSA) | 1,390,000 | 1,511,764 | ||
| Boston 5.75%, 2/1/2010 | 1,000,000 a | 1,101,070 | ||
| Boston Convention Center Act 1997, | ||||
| Special Obligation | ||||
| 5%, 5/1/2016 (Insured; AMBAC) | 2,000,000 | 2,140,300 | ||
| Boston Industrial Development | ||||
| Financing Authority, Revenue | ||||
| (Pilot Seafood Project) 5.875%, 4/1/2007 | ||||
| (LOC; Canadian Imperial Bank) | 965,000 | 985,834 | ||
| Boston Water and Sewer Commission, Revenue | ||||
| 5% 11/1/2020 | 2,000,000 | 2,139,240 | ||
| Fall River: | ||||
| 5.25%, 6/1/2010 (Insured; MBIA) | 1,000,000 | 1,045,380 | ||
| 5.25%, 2/1/2018 (Insured; FSA) | 750,000 | 822,690 | ||
| Holyoke Gas and Electric Department, Revenue | ||||
| 5.375%, 12/1/2015 (Insured; MBIA) | 1,245,000 | 1,376,447 | ||
| Lancaster 5%, 4/15/2019 (Insured; AMBAC) | 515,000 | 554,114 | ||
| Lawrence 5.50%, 2/1/2012 (Insured; AMBAC) | 570,000 | 626,447 | ||
| Massachusetts: | ||||
| 6%, 8/1/2010 (Insured; AMBAC) | 1,500,000 | 1,674,615 | ||
| Consolidated Loan | ||||
| 5%, 3/1/2019 | 1,640,000 | 1,749,700 | ||
| Federal Highway: | ||||
| 5.50%, 12/15/2009 | 1,000,000 | 1,087,160 | ||
| GAN 5.50%, 6/15/2014 | 1,000,000 | 1,071,200 | ||
| Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority: | ||||
| Assessment Revenue 5.25%, 7/1/2014 | 1,000,000 a | 1,112,170 | ||
| General Transportation System | ||||
| 5.50%, 3/1/2012 (Insured; MBIA) | 1,000,000 | 1,112,730 | ||
| Massachusetts Developmental Finance Agency: | ||||
| RRR (Semass Systems) | ||||
| 5.625%, 1/1/2014 (Insured; MBIA) | 2,000,000 | 2,201,280 | ||
| SWDR (Waste Management Inc.) | ||||
| 5.45%, 6/1/2014 | 1,500,000 | 1,602,600 |
| The Fund 7 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
| Principal | ||||
| Long-Term Municipal Investments (continued) | Amount ($) | Value ($) | ||
| Massachusetts (continued) | ||||
| Massachusetts Educational Financing Authority, | ||||
| Education Loan Revenue: | ||||
| 5.70%, 7/1/2011 (Insured; AMBAC) | 720,000 | 724,601 | ||
| 5%, 1/1/2013 (Insured; AMBAC) | 1,440,000 | 1,475,410 | ||
| 5.125%, 12/1/2014 (Insured; MBIA) | 740,000 | 742,767 | ||
| Massachusetts Health and Educational | ||||
| Facilities Authority, Revenue: | ||||
| (Berkshire Health Systems Issue) | ||||
| 5%, 10/1/2019 (Insured; Assured Guaranty) | 1,500,000 | 1,590,900 | ||
| (Hallmark Health System) | ||||
| 5.25%, 7/1/2010 (Insured; FSA) | 2,055,000 | 2,174,663 | ||
| (Harvard Pilgrim Health) | ||||
| 5.25%, 7/1/2011 (Insured; FSA) | 1,675,000 | 1,759,872 | ||
| (Healthcare System—Covenant Health) | ||||
| 6.50%, 7/1/2017 | 1,485,000 | 1,662,888 | ||
| (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) | ||||
| 5%, 7/1/2023 | 1,155,000 | 1,282,789 | ||
| (Partners Healthcare System): | ||||
| 5.125%, 7/1/2011 (Insured; MBIA) | 1,000,000 | 1,040,310 | ||
| 5%, 7/1/2018 | 1,315,000 | 1,388,364 | ||
| 5%, 7/1/2021 | 1,000,000 | 1,060,130 | ||
| (University of Massachusetts—Worcester Campus) | ||||
| 5.25%, 10/1/2014 (Insured; FGIC) | 1,000,000 | 1,087,970 | ||
| Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency | ||||
| (Insured Construction Loan Notes) | ||||
| 3.15%, 6/1/2008 (Insured; FSA) | 1,000,000 | 994,350 | ||
| Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co., | ||||
| Power Supply System Revenue: | ||||
| (Nuclear Project No. 4) | ||||
| 5.25%, 7/1/2014 (Insured; MBIA) | 2,000,000 | 2,187,780 | ||
| (Project No. 6) | ||||
| 5.25%, 7/1/2012 (Insured; MBIA) | 1,810,000 | 1,986,946 | ||
| Massachusetts Water Pollution Abatement Trust, | ||||
| Water Pollution Abatement Revenue | ||||
| (Massachusetts Water Resources | ||||
| Authority Program): | ||||
| 6%, 8/1/2009 | 285,000 a | 315,427 | ||
| 6%, 8/1/2014 | 1,015,000 | 1,119,494 |
| 8 |
| Principal | ||||
| Long-Term Municipal Investments (continued) | Amount ($) | Value ($) | ||
| Massachusetts (continued) | ||||
| Massachusetts Water Resource Authority: | ||||
| 5.50%, 8/1/2011 (Insured; MBIA) | 2,000,000 | 2,217,180 | ||
| 5.25%, 8/1/2021 (Insured; MBIA) | 1,500,000 | 1,665,615 | ||
| Mendon Upton Regional School District | ||||
| 5%, 6/1/2017 (Insured; MBIA) | 2,625,000 | 2,841,300 | ||
| New England Education Loan Marketing Corp., | ||||
| Student Loan Revenue 6.90%, 11/1/2009 | 1,000,000 | 1,053,720 | ||
| Plymouth County, COP (Correctional Facility Project) | ||||
| 5.125%, 4/1/2013 (Insured; AMBAC) | 2,000,000 | 2,144,780 | ||
| Route 3 North Transportation Improvement Association, LR | ||||
| 5.75%, 6/15/2015 (Insured; MBIA) | 1,500,000 | 1,648,320 | ||
| Sandwich 5%, 7/15/2019 (Insured; MBIA) | 1,580,000 | 1,716,923 | ||
| Springfield, Municipal Purpose Loan | ||||
| 5%, 8/1/2018 (Insured; FGIC) | 1,000,000 | 1,076,960 | ||
| Triton Regional School District | ||||
| 5%, 4/1/2016 (Insured; FGIC) | 1,420,000 | 1,530,036 | ||
| Worcester 5.25%, 8/15/2016 (Insured; MBIA) | 1,000,000 | 1,111,890 | ||
| U.S. Related—19.8% | ||||
| Childrens Trust Fund of Puerto Rico, | ||||
| Tobacco Settlement Revenue: | ||||
| 5.75%, 7/1/2010 | 2,000,000 a | 2,215,200 | ||
| 5.75%, 7/1/2010 | 2,000,000 a | 2,215,200 | ||
| Guam Economic Development Authority: | ||||
| 0/5%, 11/15/2007 | 860,000 b | 784,449 | ||
| Tobacco Settlement 0/5.40%, 11/15/2007 | 350,000 b | 314,086 | ||
| Guam Government, LOR (Infrastructure Improvement) | ||||
| 5%, 11/1/2012 (Insured; AMBAC) | 1,000,000 | 1,055,610 | ||
| Puerto Rico Commonwealth: | ||||
| 5.25%, 7/1/2014 (Insued; FSA) | 1,000,000 | 1,118,500 | ||
| 5.25%, 7/1/2023 | 1,000,000 | 1,055,930 | ||
| Puerto Rico Commonwealth Infrastructure Financing | ||||
| Authority, Special Tax Revenue | ||||
| 5.50%, 7/1/2021 (Insured; FGIC) | 1,000,000 | 1,165,670 | ||
| Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Power Revenue | ||||
| 5.50%, 7/1/2008 | 1,000,000 | 1,050,930 | ||
| The Fund 9 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
| Principal | ||||
| Long-Term Municipal Investments (continued) | Amount ($) | Value ($) | ||
| U.S. Related (continued) | ||||
| Puerto Rico Municipal Finance Agency | ||||
| 5%, 7/1/2009 (Insured; FSA) | 1,725,000 | 1,807,196 | ||
| Virgin Islands Public Finance Authority, Revenue: | ||||
| Gross Receipts Taxes Loan: | ||||
| 5.625%, 10/1/2010 | 1,000,000 | 1,048,070 | ||
| 5.25%, 10/1/2021 (Insured; FSA) | 1,000,000 | 1,096,500 | ||
| Subordinated Lien 5.875%, 10/1/2018 | 500,000 | 524,850 | ||
| Virgin Islands Water and Power Authority, Electric Systems | ||||
| 5.125%, 7/1/2011 | 1,000,000 | 1,048,100 | ||
| Total Long-Term Municipal Investments | ||||
| (cost $77,165,520) | 80,016,417 | |||
| Short-Term Municipal Investment—2.4% | ||||
| Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, | ||||
| Multi-Modal Subordinated General Revenue | ||||
| 2.71% (LOC; Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen Girozentrale) | ||||
| (cost $2,035,000) | 2,035,000 c | 2,035,000 | ||
| Total Investments (cost $79,200,520) | 98.2% | 82,051,417 | ||
| Cash and Receivables (Net) | 1.8% | 1,474,442 | ||
| Net Assets | 100.0% | 83,525,859 | ||
| 10 |
| Summary of Abbreviations | ||||||
| ACA | American Capital Access | GNMA | Government National Mortgage | |||
| AGIC | Asset Guaranty Insurance Company | Association | ||||
| AMBAC | American Municipal Bond | GO | General Obligation | |||
| Assurance Corporation | HR | Hospital Revenue | ||||
| ARRN | Adjustable Rate Receipt Notes | IDB | Industrial Development Board | |||
| BAN | Bond Anticipation Notes | IDC | Industrial Development Corporation | |||
| BIGI | Bond Investors Guaranty Insurance | IDR | Industrial Development Revenue | |||
| BPA | Bond Purchase Agreement | LOC | Letter of Credit | |||
| CGIC | Capital Guaranty Insurance | LOR | Limited Obligation Revenue | |||
| Company | LR | Lease Revenue | ||||
| CIC | Continental Insurance Company | MBIA | Municipal Bond Investors Assurance | |||
| CIFG | CDC Ixis Financial Guaranty | Insurance Corporation | ||||
| CMAC | Capital Market Assurance | MFHR | Multi-Family Housing Revenue | |||
| Corporation | MFMR | Multi-Family Mortgage Revenue | ||||
| COP | Certificate of Participation | PCR | Pollution Control Revenue | |||
| CP | Commercial Paper | RAC | Revenue Anticipation Certificates | |||
| EDR | Economic Development Revenue | RAN | Revenue Anticipation Notes | |||
| EIR | Environmental Improvement | RAW | Revenue Anticipation Warrants | |||
| Revenue | RRR | Resources Recovery Revenue | ||||
| FGIC | Financial Guaranty Insurance | SAAN | State Aid Anticipation Notes | |||
| Company | SBPA | Standby Bond Purchase Agreement | ||||
| FHA | Federal Housing Administration | SFHR | Single Family Housing Revenue | |||
| FHLB | Federal Home Loan Bank | SFMR | Single Family Mortgage Revenue | |||
| FHLMC | Federal Home Loan Mortgage | SONYMA | State of New York Mortgage Agency | |||
| Corporation | SWDR | Solid Waste Disposal Revenue | ||||
| FNMA | Federal National Mortgage | TAN | Tax Anticipation Notes | |||
| Association | TAW | Tax Anticipation Warrants | ||||
| FSA | Financial Security Assurance | TRAN | Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes | |||
| GAN | Grant Anticipation Notes | XLCA | XL Capital Assurance | |||
| GIC | Guaranteed Investment Contract | |||||
| The Fund 11 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
| Summary of Combined Ratings (Unaudited) | ||||||||
| Fitch | or Moody’s | or Standard & Poor’s | Value (%) † | |||||
| AAA | Aaa | AAA | 72.3 | |||||
| AA | Aa | AA | 14.2 | |||||
| A | A | A | 4.6 | |||||
| BBB | Baa | BBB | 5.8 | |||||
| F1 | MIG1/P1 | SP1/A1 | 2.5 | |||||
| Not Rated d | Not Rated d | Not Rated d | .6 | |||||
| 100.0 | ||||||||
| † | Based on total investments. | |||||||
| a | These securities are prerefunded; the date shown represents the prerefunded date. Bonds which are prerefunded are | |||||||
| collateralized by U.S. Government securities which are held in escrow and are used to pay principal and interest on | ||||||||
| the municipal issue and to retire the bonds in full at the earliest refunding date. | ||||||||
| b | Zero coupon until a specified date, at which time the stated coupon rate becomes effective until maturity. | |||||||
| c | Securities payable on demand.Variable interest rate—subject to periodic change. | |||||||
| d | Securities which, while not rated by Fitch, Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, have been determined by the Manager to | |||||||
| be of comparable quality to those rated securities in which the fund may invest. | ||||||||
| e | At September 30, 2005, 27.4% of the fund’s net assets are insured by MBIA. | |||||||
| See notes to financial statements. | ||||||||
| 12 |
| STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES |
| September 30, 2005 (Unaudited) |
| Cost | Value | |||
| Assets ($): | ||||
| Investments in securities—See Statement of Investments | 79,200,520 | 82,051,417 | ||
| Cash | 513,821 | |||
| Interest receivable | 1,147,127 | |||
| Receivable for shares of Beneficial Interest subscribed | 554 | |||
| Prepaid expenses | 5,390 | |||
| 83,718,309 | ||||
| Liabilities ($): | ||||
| Due to The Dreyfus Corporation and affiliates—Note 3(b) | 41,035 | |||
| Payable for shares of Beneficial Interest redeemed | 115,326 | |||
| Accrued expenses | 36,089 | |||
| 192,450 | ||||
| Net Assets ($) | 83,525,859 | |||
| Composition of Net Assets ($): | ||||
| Paid-in capital | 80,772,828 | |||
| Accumulated undistributed investment income—net | 13,548 | |||
| Accumulated net realized gain (loss) on investments | (111,414) | |||
| Accumulated net unrealized appreciation | ||||
| (depreciation) on investments | 2,850,897 | |||
| Net Assets ($) | 83,525,859 | |||
| Shares Outstanding | ||||
| (unlimited number of $.001 par value shares of Beneficial Interest authorized) | 6,048,936 | |||
| Net Asset Value, offering and redemption price per share—Note 3(d) ($) | 13.81 | |||
| See notes to financial statements. |
| The Fund 13 |
| STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS |
| Six Months Ended September 30, 2005 (Unaudited) |
| Investment Income ($): | ||
| Interest Income | 1,902,713 | |
| Expenses: | ||
| Management fee—Note 3(a) | 259,345 | |
| Shareholder servicing costs—Note 3(b) | 37,703 | |
| Auditing fees | 18,144 | |
| Legal fees | 10,741 | |
| Prospectus and shareholders’ reports | 8,150 | |
| Registration fees | 5,901 | |
| Custodian fees | 5,599 | |
| Trustees’ fees and expenses—Note 3(c) | 5,486 | |
| Loan commitment fees—Note 2 | 239 | |
| Miscellaneous | 8,963 | |
| Total Expenses | 360,271 | |
| Less—reduction in management fee | ||
| due to undertaking—Note 3(a) | (18,873) | |
| Less—reduction in custody fees due to | ||
| earnings credits—Note 1(a) | (3,117) | |
| Net Expenses | 338,281 | |
| Investment Income—Net | 1,564,432 | |
| Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments—Note 4 ($): | ||
| Net realized gain (loss) on investments | 131,244 | |
| Net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments | 253,419 | |
| Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments | 384,663 | |
| Net Increase in Net Assets Resulting from Operations | 1,949,095 | |
| See notes to financial statements. |
| 14 |
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
| Six Months Ended | ||||
| September 30, 2005 | Year Ended | |||
| (Unaudited) | March 31, 2005 | |||
| Operations ($): | ||||
| Investment income—net | 1,564,432 | 3,177,633 | ||
| Net realized gain (loss) on investments | 131,244 | 412,971 | ||
| Net unrealized appreciation | ||||
| (depreciation) on investments | 253,419 | (3,482,446) | ||
| Net Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets | ||||
| Resulting from Operations | 1,949,095 | 108,158 | ||
| Dividends to Shareholders from ($): | ||||
| Investment income—net | (1,563,053) | (3,175,000) | ||
| Net realized gain on investments | — | (136,277) | ||
| Total Dividends | (1,563,053) | (3,311,277) | ||
| Beneficial Interest Transactions ($): | ||||
| Net proceeds from shares sold | 7,206,231 | 7,890,875 | ||
| Dividends reinvested | 1,279,165 | 2,717,487 | ||
| Cost of shares redeemed | (12,004,346) | (20,300,265) | ||
| Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets | ||||
| from Beneficial Interest Transactions | (3,518,950) | (9,691,903) | ||
| Total Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets | (3,132,908) | (12,895,022) | ||
| Net Assets ($): | ||||
| Beginning of Period | 86,658,767 | 99,553,789 | ||
| End of Period | 83,525,859 | 86,658,767 | ||
| Undistributed investment income—net | 13,548 | — | ||
| Capital Share Transactions (Shares): | ||||
| Shares sold | 517,552 | 566,235 | ||
| Shares issued for dividends reinvested | 91,891 | 194,886 | ||
| Shares redeemed | (861,226) | (1,457,033) | ||
| Net Increase (Decrease) in Shares Outstanding | (251,783) | (695,912) |
| See notes to financial statements. |
| The Fund 15 |
| FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS |
The following table describes the performance for the fiscal periods indicated. Total return shows how much your investment in the fund would have increased (or decreased) during each period, assuming you had reinvested all dividends and distributions.These figures have been derived from the fund’s financial statements.
| Six Months Ended | ||||||||||||
| September 30, 2005 | Year Ended March 31, | |||||||||||
| (Unaudited) | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 a | 2001 | |||||||
| Per Share Data ($): | ||||||||||||
| Net asset value, | ||||||||||||
| beginning of period | 13.75 | 14.23 | 14.15 | 13.47 | 13.70 | 13.12 | ||||||
| Investment Operations: | ||||||||||||
| Investment income—net | .25b | .49b | .49b | .51b | .54b | .59 | ||||||
| Net realized and unrealized | ||||||||||||
| gain (loss) on investments | .06 | (.46) | .08 | .69 | (.23) | .58 | ||||||
| Total from Investment Operations | .31 | .03 | .57 | 1.20 | .31 | 1.17 | ||||||
| Distributions: | ||||||||||||
| Dividends from | ||||||||||||
| investment income—net | (.25) | (.49) | (.49) | (.52) | (.54) | (.59) | ||||||
| Dividends from net realized | ||||||||||||
| gain on investments | — | (.02) | — | — | — | — | ||||||
| Total Distributions | (.25) | (.51) | (.49) | (.52) | (.54) | (.59) | ||||||
| Net asset value, end of period | 13.81 | 13.75 | 14.23 | 14.15 | 13.47 | 13.70 | ||||||
| Total Return (%) | 2.27c | .22 | 4.10 | 9.09 | 2.19 | 9.11 | ||||||
| Ratios/Supplemental Data (%): | ||||||||||||
| Ratio of total expenses | ||||||||||||
| to average net assets | .83d | .83 | .80 | .76 | .75 | .85 | ||||||
| Ratio of net expenses | ||||||||||||
| to average net assets | .78d | .80 | .79 | .76 | .75 | .80 | ||||||
| Ratio of net investment income | ||||||||||||
| to average net assets | 3.62d | 3.50 | 3.45 | 3.68 | 3.92 | 4.40 | ||||||
| Portfolio Turnover Rate | 8.09c | 33.82 | 20.93 | 33.40 | 14.45 | 12.85 | ||||||
| Net Assets, end of period | ||||||||||||
| ($ x 1,000) | 83,526 | 86,659 | 99,554 | 128,328 | 118,656 | 81,905 | ||||||
| a | As required, effective April 1, 2001, the fund has adopted the provisions of the AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide | |
| for Investment Companies and began accreting discount or amortizing premium on a scientific basis for debt securities | ||
| on a daily basis.The effect of this change for the period ended March 31, 2002 was to increase net investment income | ||
| per share and decrease net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments by less than $.01 and increase the ratio | ||
| of net investment income to average net assets by less than .01%. Per share data and ratios/supplemental data for | ||
| periods prior to April 1, 2001 have not been restated to reflect this change in presentation. | ||
| b | Based on average shares outstanding at each month end. | |
| c | Not annualized. | |
| d | Annuailized | |
| See notes to financial statements. | ||
| 16 |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited)
NOTE 1—Significant Accounting Policies:
Dreyfus Massachusetts Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund (the “fund”) is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Act”), as a non-diversified open-end management investment company. The fund’s investment objective is to provide investors with as high a level of current income exempt from federal and Massachusetts state income taxes as is consistent with the preservation of capital.The Dreyfus Corporation (the “Manager” or “Dreyfus”) serves as the fund’s investment adviser.The Manager is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mellon Financial Corporation (“Mellon Financial”). Dreyfus Service Corporation (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Manager, is the distributor of the fund’s shares, which are sold to the public without a sales charge.
The fund’s financial statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, which may require the use of management estimates and assumptions. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
The fund enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The fund’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown.The fund does not anticipate recognizing any loss related to these arrangements.
(a) Portfolio valuation: Investments in securities are valued each business day by an independent pricing service (the “Service”) approved by the Board of Trustees. Investments for which quoted bid prices are readily available and are representative of the bid side of the market in the judgment of the Service are valued at the mean between the quoted bid prices (as obtained by the Service from dealers in such securities) and asked prices (as calculated by the Service based upon its evaluation of the market for such securities). Other investments (which constitute a majority of the portfolio securities) are carried at fair value as determined by the Service, based on methods which include consideration of: yields or prices of municipal securities of comparable quality, coupon, maturity and type; indications as to values from dealers; and
| The Fund 17 |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
general market conditions. Options and financial futures on municipal and U.S.Treasury securities are valued at the last sales price on the securities exchange on which such securities are primarily traded or at the last sales price on the national securities market on each business day.
(b) Securities transactions and investment income: Securities transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gain and loss from securities transactions are recorded on the identified cost basis. Interest income, adjusted for accretion of discount and amortization of premium on investments, is earned from settlement date and recognized on the accrual basis. Securities purchased or sold on a when-issued or delayed-delivery basis may be settled a month or more after the trade date.
The fund has an arrangement with the custodian bank whereby the fund receives earnings credits from the custodian when positive cash balances are maintained, which are used to offset custody fees. For financial reporting purposes, the fund includes net earnings credits as an expense offset in the Statement of Operations.
The fund follows an investment policy of investing primarily in municipal obligations of one state. Economic changes affecting the state and certain of its public bodies and municipalities may affect the ability of issuers within the state to pay interest on, or repay principal of, municipal obligations held by the fund.
(c) Dividends to shareholders: It is the policy of the fund to declare dividends daily from investment income-net. Such dividends are paid monthly. Dividends from net realized capital gain, if any, are normally declared and paid annually, but the fund may make distributions on a more frequent basis to comply with the distribution requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).To the extent that net realized capital gain can be offset by capital loss carryovers, it is the policy of the fund not to distribute such gain. Income and capital gain distributions are determined in accordance with income tax regulations, which may differ from U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
| 18 |
(d) Federal income taxes: It is the policy of the fund to continue to qualify as a regulated investment company, which can distribute tax exempt dividends, by complying with the applicable provisions of the Code, and to make distributions of income and net realized capital gain sufficient to relieve it from substantially all federal income and excise taxes.
The fund has unused capital loss carryover of $242,659 available for federal income tax purposes to be applied against future net securi ties profits, if any, realized subsequent to March 31, 2005. If not applied, $4,848 of the carryover expires in fiscal 2009 and $237,811 expires in fiscal 2011.
The tax character of distributions paid to shareholders during the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 were as follows: tax exempt income $3,175,000 and long term capital gains $136,277. The tax character of current year distributions will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year.
NOTE 2—Bank Line of Credit:
The fund participates with other Dreyfus-managed funds in a $350 million redemption credit facility (the “Facility”) to be utilized for temporary or emergency purposes, including the financing of redemptions. In connection therewith, the fund has agreed to pay commitment fees on its pro rata portion of the Facility. Interest is charged to the fund at rates based on prevailing market rates in effect at the time of borrowings. During the period ended September 30, 2005, the fund did not borrow under the Facility.
NOTE 3—Management Fee and Other Transactions With Affiliates:
(a) Pursuant to a management agreement with the Manager, the management fee is computed at the annual rate of .60% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets and is payable monthly.The Manager had
| The Fund 19 |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
undertaken from April 1, 2005 through September 30, 2005, to reduce the management fee paid by the fund, to the extent that the fund’s aggregate annual expenses, exclusive of taxes, brokerage fees, interest on borrowings, commitment fees and extraordinary expenses, exceed an annual rate of .80% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets.The reduction in management fee, pursuant to the undertaking, amounted to $18,873 during the period ended September 30, 2005.
(b) Under the Shareholder Services Plan, the fund reimburses the Distributor an amount not to exceed an annual rate of .25% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets for certain allocated expenses of providing personal services and/or maintaining shareholder accounts.The services provided may include personal services relating to shareholder accounts, such as answering shareholder inquiries regarding the fund and providing reports and other information, and services related to the maintenance of shareholder accounts. During the period September 30, 2005, the fund was charged $14,365 pursuant to the Shareholder Services Plan.
The fund compensates Dreyfus Transfer, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Manager, under a transfer agency agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the fund. During the period ended, September 30 2005, the fund was charged $12,094 pursuant to the transfer agency agreement.
During the period ended September 30, 2005, the fund was charged $1,847 for services performed by the Chief Compliance Officer.
The components of Due to The Dreyfus Corporation and affiliates in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities consist of: management fees $41,288, chief compliance officer fees $929 and transfer agency per account fees $3,960, which are offset against an expense reimbursement currently in effect in the amount of $5,142.
| 20 |
(c) Each Board member also serves as a Board member of other funds within the Dreyfus complex. Annual retainer fees and attendance fees are allocated to each fund based on net assets.
(d) A 1% redemption fee is charged and retained by the fund on certain shares redeemed within thirty days following the date of issuance, including redemptions made through the use of the fund’s exchange privilege.
NOTE 4—Securities Transactions:
The aggregate amount of purchases and sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, during the period ended September 30, 2005, amounted to $6,791,562 and $13,817,339, respectively.
At September 30 , 2005, accumulated net unrealized appreciation on investments was $2,850,897, consisting of $2,987,015 gross unrealized appreciation and $136,118 gross unrealized depreciation.
At September 30, 2005, the cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. (see the Statement of Investments).
| The Fund 21 |
| INFORMATION ABOUT THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL |
| OF THE FUND’S MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT (Unaudited) |
At a meeting of the Board of Trustees held on August 10, 2005, the Board considered the re-approval for an annual period of the fund’s Management Agreement, pursuant to which the Manager provides the fund with investment advisory and administrative services. The Board members, none of whom are “interested persons” (as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended) of the fund were assisted in their review by independent legal counsel and met with counsel in executive session separate from representatives of the Manager.
Analysis of Nature, Extent, and Quality of Services Provided to the Fund. The Board members received a presentation from representatives of the Manager regarding services provided to the fund and other funds in the Dreyfus fund complex, and discussed the nature, extent, and quality of the services provided to the fund pursuant to its Management Agreement.The Manager’s representatives reviewed the fund’s distribution of accounts and the relationships the Manager has with various intermediaries and the different needs of each. The Manager’s representatives noted the diversity of distribution of the fund as well as among the funds in the Dreyfus fund complex, and the Manager’s corresponding need for broad, deep, and diverse resources to be able to provide ongoing shareholder services to each of the fund’s distribution channels.The Board members also reviewed the number of shareholder accounts in the fund, as well as the fund’s asset size.
The Board members also considered the Manager’s research and portfolio management capabilities and that the Manager also provides oversight of day-to-day fund operations, including fund accounting and administration and assistance in meeting legal and regulatory requirements. The Board members also considered the Manager’s extensive administrative, accounting, and compliance infrastructure.
Comparative Analysis of the Fund’s Performance, Management Fee, and Expense Ratio. The Board members reviewed the fund’s performance, management fee, and expense ratio and placed significant emphasis on comparisons to a group of comparable funds, and to Lipper category averages, as applicable.The group of comparable funds was previously
| 22 |
approved by the Board for this purpose, and was prepared using a Board-approved selection methodology that was based, in part, on selecting non-affiliated funds reported in the same Lipper category (the “Massachusetts Intermediate Municipal Debt Funds” category) as the fund.The Board members discussed the results of the comparisons for various time periods ended June 30, 2005.The Board members noted that the Comparison Group consisted of only two other funds and that the fund outperformed these funds on a yield performance basis for the 1-year period and on a total return basis for the 3-year period (and outperformed one of the two funds for the 1-year period). The Board members also noted that the Fund outperformed the Lipper category average for each reported time period on a yield and total return basis. The Board members also discussed the fund’s management fee and expense ratio and reviewed the range of management fees and expense ratios for the funds in the Comparison Group.The fund’s management fee was at the median among the fees of the Comparison Group funds. The Board members noted that the fund’s total expense ratio was lower than the Comparison Group and Lipper category averages.
The Board members also reviewed the fee paid to the Manager or its affiliates by mutual funds managed by the Manager or its affiliates with similar investment objectives, policies, and strategies, and in the same Lipper category, as the fund (the “Similar Funds”).The Manager’s representatives explained the nature of the Similar Funds and the differences, from the Manager’s perspective, in management of the Similar Funds as compared to managing and servicing the fund.The two Similar Funds had lower management fees than the fund.The Board analyzed the differences in fees paid to the Manager and discussed the relationship of the advisory fees paid in light of the Manager’s comprehensive array of advisory, administrative, and other services provided to the fund.The Board members considered the relevance of the fee information provided for the Similar Funds to evaluate the appropriateness and reasonableness of the fund’s management fee. The Manager’s representatives noted that there were no similarly managed institutional separate accounts, or wrap
| The Fund 23 |
| I N FO R M AT I O N A B O U T T H E | R E V I E W A N D | A P P R OVA L | O F T H E | |||
| F U N D ’S M A N A G E M E N T | A G R E E M E N T | ( U n a u d i t e d ) | ( c o n t i n u e d ) |
fee accounts managed by the Manager or its affiliates with similar investment objectives, policies, and strategies as the fund.
Analysis of Profitability and Economies of Scale. The Manager’s representatives reviewed the dollar amount of expenses allocated and profit received by the Manager and the method used to determine such expenses and profit. The Board received and considered information prepared by an independent consulting firm regarding the Manager’s approach to allocating costs to, and determining the profitability of, individual funds and the entire Dreyfus mutual fund complex. The Manager’s representatives stated that the methodology had also been reviewed by an independent registered public accounting firm which, like the consultant, found the methodology to be reasonable.The consulting firm also analyzed where any economies of scale might emerge in connection with the management of the fund.The Board members evaluated the analysis in light of the relevant circumstances for the fund, including the decline in fund assets, and the extent to which economies of scale would be realized as the fund grows and whether fee levels reflect these economies of scale for the benefit of fund investors. The Board noted that it appeared that the benefits of any economies of scale also would be appropriately shared with shareholders through increased investment in fund management and administration resources. The Board members also considered potential benefits to the Manager from acting as investment adviser and noted that there were no soft dollar arrangements with respect to trading the fund’s portfolio.
It was noted that the Board members should consider the Manager’s profitability with respect to the fund as part of their evaluation of whether the fee under the Management Agreement bears a reasonable relationship to the mix of services provided by the Manager, including the nature, extent, and quality of such services and that a discussion of economies of scale is predicated on increasing assets and that, if a fund’s assets had been decreasing, the possibility that the Manager may have realized any economies of scale would be less.The Board members also discussed the profitability percentage ranges determined by appropriate court cases to be reasonable given the services rendered to invest-
| 24 |
ment companies. It was noted that the profitability percentage for managing the fund was not unreasonable given the fund’s overall performance and generally superior service levels provided. The Board also noted the Manager’s absorption of certain expenses of the Fund over the past year and its effect on the profitability of the Manager.
At the conclusion of these discussions, each Board member expressed the opinion that he or she had been furnished with sufficient information to make an informed business decision with respect to continuation of the fund’s Management Agreement. Based on their discussions and considerations as described above, the Board members made the following conclusions and determinations.
- The Board concluded that the nature, extent, and quality of the ser- vices provided by the Manager are adequate and appropriate.
- The Board was satisfied with the fund’s performance.
- The Board concluded that the fee paid to the Manager by the fund was reasonable in light of comparative performance and expense and advisory fee information, costs of the services provided, and profits to be realized and benefits derived or to be derived by the Manager from its relationship with the fund.
- The Board determined that the economies of scale which may accrue to the Manager and its affiliates in connection with the man- agement of the fund had been adequately considered by the Manager in connection with the management fee rate charged to the fund, and that, to the extent in the future it were to be deter- mined that material economies of scale had not been shared with the fund, the Board would seek to have those economies of scale shared with the fund.
The Board members considered these conclusions and determinations, along with the information received on a routine and regular basis throughout the year, and, without any one factor being dispositive, the Board determined that re-approval of the fund’s Management Agreement was in the best interests of the fund and its shareholders.
| The Fund 25 |
For More Information
| Dreyfus | Transfer Agent & | |
| Massachusetts Intermediate | Dividend Disbursing Agent | |
| Municipal Bond Fund | Dreyfus Transfer, Inc. | |
| 200 Park Avenue | 200 Park Avenue | |
| New York, NY 10166 | New York, NY 10166 | |
| Manager | Distributor | |
| The Dreyfus Corporation | Dreyfus Service Corporation | |
| 200 Park Avenue | 200 Park Avenue | |
| New York, NY 10166 | New York, NY 10166 | |
| Custodian | ||
| The Bank of New York | ||
| One Wall Street | ||
| New York, NY 10286 | ||
| Telephone 1-800-645-6561 |
| Mail The Dreyfus Family of Funds, 144 Glenn Curtiss Boulevard, Uniondale, NY 11556-0144 |
| E-mail Send your request to info@dreyfus.com |
| Internet Information can be viewed online or downloaded at: http://www.dreyfus.com |
The fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The fund's Forms N-Q are available on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov and may be reviewed and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330.
Information regarding how the fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities for the 12-month period ended June 30, 2005, is available on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov and without charge, upon request, by calling 1-800-645-6561.
Item 2. Code of Ethics.
Not applicable.
Item 3. Audit Committee Financial Expert.
Not applicable.
Item 4. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
Not applicable.
Item 5. Audit Committee of Listed Registrants.
Not applicable.
Item 6. Schedule of Investments.
Not applicable.
Item 7. Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 8. Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 9. Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Companies and Affiliated Purchasers.
Not applicable.
Item 10. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
The Registrant has a Nominating Committee (the "Committee"), which is responsible for selecting and nominating persons for election or appointment by the Registrant's Board as Board members. The Committee has adopted a Nominating Committee Charter (the "Charter"). Pursuant to the Charter, the Committee will consider recommendations for nominees from shareholders submitted to the Secretary of the Registrant, c/o The Dreyfus Corporation Legal Department, 200 Park Avenue, 8th Floor East, New York, New York 10166. A nomination submission must include information regarding the recommended nominee as specified in the Charter. This information includes all information relating to a recommended nominee that is required to be disclosed in solicitations or proxy statements for the election of Board members, as well as information sufficient to evaluate the factors to be considered by the Committee, including character and integrity, business and professional experience, and whether the person has the ability to apply sound and independent business judgment and would act in the interests of the Registrant and its shareholders.
| -2- |
Nomination submissions are required to be accompanied by a written consent of the individual to stand for election if nominated by the Board and to serve if elected by the shareholders, and such additional information must be provided regarding the recommended nominee as reasonably requested by the Committee.
Item 11. Controls and Procedures.
(a) The Registrant's principal executive and principal financial officers have concluded, based on their evaluation of the Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days of the filing date of this report, that the Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures are reasonably designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant on Form N-CSR is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the required time periods and that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant in the reports that it files or submits on Form N-CSR is accumulated and communicated to the Registrant's management, including its principal executive and principal financial officers, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
(b) There were no changes to the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the second fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
Item 12. Exhibits.
| (a)(1) | Not applicable. | |
| (a)(2) | Certifications of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(a) | |
| under the Investment Company Act of 1940. | ||
| (a)(3) | Not applicable. | |
| (b) | Certification of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(b) | |
| under the Investment Company Act of 1940. | ||
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
DREYFUS MASSACHUSETTS INTERMEDIATE MUNICIPAL BOND FUND
| By: | /s/ Stephen E. Canter | |
| Stephen E. Canter | ||
| President | ||
| Date: | November 29, 2005 | |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
-3-
| By: | /s/ Stephen E. Canter | |
| Stephen E. Canter | ||
| Chief Executive Officer | ||
| Date: | November 29, 2005 | |
| By: | /s/ James Windels | |
| James Windels | ||
| Chief Financial Officer | ||
| Date: | November 29, 2005 | |
| EXHIBIT INDEX |
(a)(2) Certifications of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. (EX-99.CERT)
(b) Certification of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. (EX-99.906CERT)
| -4- |